Microsoft Deploys Linux, Open Software in Test Lab

securitas writes "Microsoft has deployed Linux and other open-source software in test labs used by business customers to experiment with Microsoft's products. The products include Linux, Apache, MySQL and Open LDAP directory-access software on Intel-based computers, according to Martin Taylor, who is in charge of Microsoft's Linux competitive strategy. He said the goal was to learn 'what can you do and how can you do it' using open-source software in a competitive analysis. This step comes after Microsoft's recent admission that Linux is Microsoft's biggest threat after economic conditions. Mirrors at CMPnetAsia and InternetWeek." It'd be cool to see some patches come from Redmond, but that's probably wishful thinking.

Comments

MS uses Linux internally

[idiot900]

I know this is no big secret, but...

I have heard from MS employees, while talking to them in person, that MS uses Linux internally in certain places. One person stated that his first account there was on a Linux box. Apparently they also use Perl too. (Any MS employees care to comment? Even as AC?)

Which makes this story that much funnier.

Re:MS uses Linux internally

[Anonymous Coward]

There are lots and lots and lots of Linux boxes running on corpnet. They are mostly used for interoperability testing, etc.

For example, what happens if you stick HTML files on a samba share, and point IIS at it and tell it to serve those files?

(the answer, btw, is that it works, sorta, as long as you have a fairly recent version of samba)

The other reason that people set up linux boxes is because they are GEEKS, and like to mess around with stuff.

Re:MS uses Linux internally

[deranged unix nut]

My experience (only three years) is that it is equal parts academia, small business, and big business with a mixture of ultra-geeky, ultra-savvy, and very smart people.

I just laugh everytime people view Microsoft as the BORG. I used to think that way, hence my handle, but Microsoft is actually filled with unique and interesting people that most of the slashdot readers would love to have as co-workers.

I have had to explain simple network concepts to co-workers, and I have had co-workers that sit around until 11pm on a friday discussing operating system internals. People take a lot of ownership in the components that they work on. Frequently I interact with fewer than a dozen people. Some groups are made from only three people, other groups are composed of thousands of smaller groups.

I can take an hour in the middle of the day to play soccer or baseball with other people in the company, or watch university level research lectures every day over the corporate network, or walk across the campus and attend the lecture in-person.

I have a co-worker who was tossing a football in the hall, knock off a sprinklerhead, flood a lab of computers, and the only result is that the VP asked the team to stop playing football in the hallway!

As for linux, I have been running a linux box for interop tests for a couple years, I just run the binaries and avoid downloading the sources.

How many slashdotters would be surprised to hear that the Microsoft "campus" is like a business park or a college campus? There are no "walls" surrounding the campus.

Don't believe the propoganda (in either direction), the truth is somewhere in the middle. Microsoft is a very nice place to work. It isn't a utopia of super-intelligent people, and it isn't an oppressive slave-driving monolith either.

Re:typical MS - aiming at the product

[Alien Being]

"IMO The problem with MS is they no longer understand the customer"

But they understand the customers' wallet. MS is doing this to find subtle ways of breaking LinWin compatibility wherever they can. Then they'll offer expensive connector software to restore the broken functionality. They'll spin it like they're playing nice with the other kids, but all the while, they'll just be taking everyone for a ride.

Old news

[pitr256]

When I worked for the evil empire, I was amazed at how many Linux/*nix/*BSD machines they had on the network, either from users running it or for testing in the lab.

Because I supported the desktops for call center people, I didn't have direct access to the ITG (Information Technology Group) management software. So instead, I found an old DEC dual p200, installed Linux on it, set up Nagios and started monitoring the ITG servers. I could call ITG to alert them of a DHCP server not assigning addresses before they could. And this happened a lot actually.

The most shocking thing about working at Microsoft during the Code Red, and Nimda outbreak, was finding out how much Microsoft eats their own dogfood. And they really do, even if that means putting untested servers into a production enviroment. The Nimda outbreak literally brought the whole corporate network to it's knees. Even the phone systems were down.

But Microsoft running Linux? Old news, in fact I think the Linux machine I made and placed under my desk in my office, is probably still monitoring the network better than the Microsoft software they used. Probably has better uptime too.

Re:MIcrosoft Linux

[linzeal]

That is because microsoft had no server OS robust enough to serve dumb clients at the time. They marketed what they had.

Re:Microsoft Linux

[deranged unix nut]

Yes, I also do testing for:

Regressions - Make sure that previous bugs don't pop up again.
Integration - Make sure that all the pieces work when you put them together.
Globalization - Make sure that none of the user messages / interfaces are hard coded.
Localization - Make sure that it is translated into other languages correctly.
Accessiblity - Make sure that handicapped users (blind / deaf / etc.) can use the product. (Can you use the program without a mouse? Does it work with large fonts, high contrast, etc?)
Scalability - Large numbers of records, large amounts of data.
Performance - Is it sufficiently fast?
Reliability / Memory leaks - Can the system stay up for multiple months without hint of reliability problems?
Security - Do we verify the data before we use it? Do we protect sensitive data?
Update testing - Does data persist and functionality work correctly after upgrades?

Dogfood deployments - run the business on alpha and beta releases to make sure we find problems before the customers do.

etc...

There are hundreds of criteria for each item on this list and there are a number of other major quality areas that most test teams attempt to cover in their test passes.

You would probably be surprised at how much testing actually happens at Microsoft.

Re:Coming soon...

[ender81b]

Journaling file system xp doesn't have it

Wrong. NTFS

Why did MS choose to have every menu in the entire system cascade down except for the single most important one? Any sane UI designer would put the Start button in the upper-left of the screen.

Click on start bar, drag to upper part of screen. Done.

Re:I'd like to see them do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Exchange Server 2000 - QMail
^^^^^^^^^^

If all you want is a pop3/smtp server than of course qmail would be cheaper. If you need a fully collaboration based mail server with calendaring/scheduling/tasks and many features I can't think off the top of my head you got with Exchange 2000. There's nothing remotely close yet that works out of the box in less than an hour. I just installed a seventh exchange server in our environment last week, flawlessly. Note: this isn't for redunancy either. Remote offices prefer to use a local server instead of crossing the internet via a vpn.

Some companies would die without the functionality of Exchange so in their eyes price does not matter.